Islamic Jihad

[Audie]

Actually the Jews in the Old Testament were the original violent war like nation

Huh? There have been people warring with each other
since long before there was a "Jew" to be found.

 

[Audie]

That’s your view and you’re entitled to it.

A dreadfully clever rejoinder when faced with
the call for a little trace of reality in your claims.

No evidence whatever that they are
not entirely the product of human imagination.
That is not a view, is is a fact.

As noted, you do facts not in evidence as a matter
of course, all of it being just your opinion, or "view".

I suppose it is natural to think others share this
deficiency.

 

[Lyndon]

A dreadfully clever rejoinder when faced with
the call for a little trace of reality in your claims.

No evidence whatever that they are
not entirely the product of human imagination.
That is not a view, is is a fact.

As noted, you do facts not in evidence as a matter
of course, all of it being just your opinion, or "view".

I suppose it is natural to think others share this
deficiency.

Here's a fact for you; You don't know what you're talking about!!

 

[Audie]

Here's a fact for you; You don't know what you're talking about!!

Terrif! Please provide us with the evidence!
You know, facts!
This will be an historic first!

 

[Lyndon]

Terrif! Please provide us with the evidence!
You know, facts!
This will be an historic first!

The evidence is your posts, try linking to them.

 

[Audie]

The evidence is your posts, try linking to them.

Well well, another terribly clever rejoinder, and
as with you pal, as free of factual info as a JW
tract.

 

[Lyndon]

Atheists seem to think they know it all, not much I can say to change their mind.

 

[Ellen Brown]

Yeah, but the Christians learned it from the Muslims. If not for Islamic conquest, the Spaniards would have never had to expel all Muslims from Spain. After that experience, the Spanish were a changed people forever. They became the conquerers.

...Thanks Islam.

I'd question that conclusion. Perhaps it is inherent in our genetics that we strive to be the best?

 

[icehorse]

If you’re not even open to the possibility that there could be a God Who sends Prophets then nothing can be verified for you.

"verification" is an idea from science. Religion is almost always based on faith, not verification. If you believe in gods and prophets, then you have "faith". What you do NOT have is verifiable evidence.

 

[sooda]

The Muslims started it all. Their prophet was a warlord and they taught all the "Abrahamics" to fight.

...The Jewish Zealots were pretty horrible people though. Maybe Mohammed learned from them how to be a radical killer.

Rules of warfare in the Koran are surprising. They are forbidden to kill women, children, the elderly, non-combatants and livestock .. They are forbidden to destroy water sources, crops and trees. At the first sign the enemy wants to talk truce, they are obliged to go to the table.

 

[sooda]

I'd question that conclusion. Perhaps it is inherent in our genetics that we strive to be the best?

Was Spain Christian? I don't think the Visgoths were Christian. Around 600 AD they converted to Arianism... which I know nothing about except that Jesus was separate from and subordinate to God.

 

[Lyndon]

I think I might be an Arian!!

 

[Ellen Brown]

Was Spain Christian? I don't think the Visgoths were Christian. Around 600 AD they converted to Arianism... which I know nothing about except that Jesus was separate from and subordinate to God.

This whole discussion about Muslims teaching Christians aggression is fruitless. To me it is like two preadolescent siblings squabbling over a toy.

As to the Trinity, that is a divisive and fruitless Issue. To me God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are three separate entities, but disagreeing about it is simply the tactic of satan to get us fighting and not devoting our time to the important things.

 

[Nakosis]

I'd disagree with that assessment. Mankind, as a whole, is prone to sin. In the hands of sinful men, religion becomes one more thing that they can abuse and corrupt for their own ends. Whether religious or non-religious, it should come as a surprise to no one that there are those who would use religion for personal gain and power.

That, however, does not mean that that is the purpose, intent, or value of religion. A scalpel's purpose is for surgery, to save and improve people's lives who are suffering from injury or disease. In the right hands, a doctor will use it as intended and help people. In the wrong hands, you get a bunch of dead bodies. The latter case does not invalidate or lessen the purpose, intent, or value of a scalpel in the right hands.

Now, different religions have different philosophies, intents, goals, etc. I won't say that all religion is fundamentally good - as I think there are religions, or at least sects within the various religions, which are fundamentally dangerous. That said, religions like Christianity exist to help people, to do what is right and good, and to teach others to do what is right and good. Indeed, the scriptures tell us that we were created for the purpose of doing good works. We are to love all - even our enemies who curse us. We are to give of ourselves to help those in need. We are taught that mercy is greater than justice. etc.

When evaluating whether various deeds are truly representative and inline with the intent of the religion under which people claim to act, we must compare those actions against what the religion actually teaches. If they murder in the name of God - does God actually call for them to murder, or does he tell them that it is a sin? When people defend racism under the name of God - what do the scriptures actually say? There is no Jew nor Gentile, Female nor Male, all are equal in Christ, Christ died for all, love one another, etc.

Religion doesn't teach, people do. Religious leaders choose what to focus on, how to interpret. If the Bible or Quran were only seen as self-help guides, people individually could get whatever they see as beneficial to themselves. What happens instead, as these religious leaders claim the authority of God they can control the masses. This is what religion does best, control folks. The Bible and Quran for the most part are used as symbols of authority. Authority given to religious leaders to dictate the will of God to the rest.

You want to use scripture because you see some personal benefit in it, ok. As long as you don't think it gives you any authority to tell anyone else how to live.

 

[Nakosis]

Here is what I’m trying to explain.

The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh (Shoghi Effendi)

IMO, a person could do just as well by ignoring all three.

I don't need "scripture" to tell me how to be a "good" person.
The problem I see is not the scripture itself, it is the authority they claim to represent.

 

[Nakosis]

How about the Laws are defined, but, certain people have misinterpreted them to misuse them for their own corrupted desires? Have you thought this could be the reason?

Baha'i IMO has a better view, that laws are just recommendation for leading a happy life.

While there are other way and perhaps better ways to find happiness at least they recommend you view scripture through your own conscience.

 

[loverofhumanity]

IMO, a person could do just as well by ignoring all three.

I don't need "scripture" to tell me how to be a "good" person.
The problem I see is not the scripture itself, it is the authority they claim to represent.

We claim we don’t need it but we have already had two world wars, a holocaust, Hiroshima and crime rates soaring through the roof not to mention drug addiction, domestic violence and suicide.

So I suppose in your estimation we are doing quite well with our new found freedom to do as we please and ignore all the laws of love religion teaches.

I want a better world for my family. So I take a path that I see leads to peace and in 175 years so far we’ve not had the problems your irreligious world has had.

 

[loverofhumanity]

A dreadfully clever rejoinder when faced with
the call for a little trace of reality in your claims.

No evidence whatever that they are
not entirely the product of human imagination.
That is not a view, is is a fact.

As noted, you do facts not in evidence as a matter
of course, all of it being just your opinion, or "view".

I suppose it is natural to think others share this
deficiency.

To me the evidence is overwhelming but if you’ve already made up your mind all the evidence in the world is not going to change your stance.

 

[loverofhumanity]

"verification" is an idea from science. Religion is almost always based on faith, not verification. If you believe in gods and prophets, then you have "faith". What you do NOT have is verifiable evidence.

Yes but I have evidence based on my own investigation however that is something earned from sincere search. A person who doesn’t search doesn’t find and won’t find truth handed them on a silver platter so will deny and oppose because they haven’t done any sincere search but just continually object without opening their minds a little.

 

[icehorse]

Yes but I have evidence based on my own investigation however that is something earned from sincere search. A person who doesn’t search doesn’t find and won’t find truth handed them on a silver platter so will deny and oppose because they haven’t done any sincere search but just continually object without opening their minds a little.

You don't have verifiable, repeatable, scientific evidence. Science isn't everything, faith is a perfectly fine idea. But let's not pretend that faith shares characteristics with science that it doesn't.